Is The American Govt. Going To Default On Their Loans By Aug 2?

[ldatsea]

i love the fact we humans when faced with real issues instead of sitting down and looking at the facts and solving the issues we resort to name calling and blaming the other guy and get nothing done.... we are a stupid species....

when we realize that we as individual people must be responsible for our OWN actions and not rely on anyone or gov can we succeed. when we where a nation of people completely self sufficient we where a better nation. and the people better people.

Gov cannot solve social and economic issues.

[BoTox]

I have an idea... why don't we just print more money.

Because money is backed by something like gold, GDP, something of value. Unless you have more of that something each new dollar dilutes the value of every other dollar. That means it takes more dollars to buy the same amount of goods which is inflation. Also, if we print more, other governments see this and want more of our dollars for their goods, also inflation. If every government printed money when it needed more we'd be like Zimbabwe where it takes a wheelbarrow full of money to buy a loaf of bread in the morning and two wheelbarrows full by afternoon.

Taxing isn't the solution either because taking 100% of everyone making over $200,000 would still not pay off the current spending habit let alone reduce the deficit. We need more people paying taxes rather than collecting a check from Uncle 0bama. If you tax more people, even at a low rate, you will collect more than if you tax the so called rich at a higher rate. Think of it as the Walmart model, sell a truck load at small profit every day or sell one every few days at high profit.

Personally, I wish more things WERE made in America but that sadly is not the case. Then we have stupid laws like the banning of 100w bulbs and the stupidity of forcing the market to go places it doesn't want or need to go is just ridiculous. Soviet Russia proved that central control is a recipe for destruction.

[sarah_ab]

hehe i was just kidding.

[Diapered Jason]

Because money is backed by something like gold, GDP, something of value. Unless you have more of that something each new dollar dilutes the value of every other dollar. That means it takes more dollars to buy the same amount of goods which is inflation. Also, if we print more, other governments see this and want more of our dollars for their goods, also inflation. If every government printed money when it needed more we'd be like Zimbabwe where it takes a wheelbarrow full of money to buy a loaf of bread in the morning and two wheelbarrows full by afternoon.

Taxing isn't the solution either because taking 100% of everyone making over $200,000 would still not pay off the current spending habit let alone reduce the deficit. We need more people paying taxes rather than collecting a check from Uncle 0bama. If you tax more people, even at a low rate, you will collect more than if you tax the so called rich at a higher rate. Think of it as the Walmart model, sell a truck load at small profit every day or sell one every few days at high profit.

Personally, I wish more things WERE made in America but that sadly is not the case. Then we have stupid laws like the banning of 100w bulbs and the stupidity of forcing the market to go places it doesn't want or need to go is just ridiculous. Soviet Russia proved that central control is a recipe for destruction.

Complain all you like about the government, but you would not have been able to post your message online without the government's help. Yes, the government provided grants to the developers of the internet. It is actually a ban on low efficient light bulbs with 30% efficiency or less, not 100w light bulbs. Still, I would have preferred a tax on those low efficient light bulbs rather than a ban so if people really want them, they can still get them. I think a tax would have been successful in phasing out low efficient light bulbs without being so intrusive.

Anyways, I have no idea how government regulation got into the discussion when it is not even on the table in D.C. right now. Besides, cutting regulatory agencies wouldn't even make a dent in the budget. Social Security, Medicare, and Defense make up about 75% of the U.S. Federal budget. Obviously raising taxes alone will not fix the budget. Cutting entitlements will have to be done too. As much as I would like to see a reduction in defense spending, it is providing many jobs and is supporting the U.S. economy ro a large extent at the moment.

[ldatsea]

we got ourselves in a no win situation.... when we set up the worlds largest Ponzi scheme called social security... no if we cut government spending we add (for a short time) to the unemployment ... as an under employed person this SUCKS more competition..... but no matter what we must fix the errors made by people long dead and gone and the people still making bad decisions.... this WILL HURT EVERYONE but it like a rotting tooth it hurts to get it removed but if you dont you DIE!....

[Diaper Mike 05]

Cutting regulation makes manufacturing more feasible in this country again, which means we could employ more people, expanding the tax base. Regulations in business are equivalent to taxes.

[drynot]

I do know that some of the politicians here in Canada seem bullish on converting our economy from a manufacturing base to a service based economy which I whole heartedly disagree with. I believe you need a strong manufacturing base and a strong middle class in order to have a strong economy.

I do think that we will all be forced to get our fiscal houses in order though. I know a number of my friends seem to enjoy being on the credit merry go round which is ok...I suppose if you can service the debt then you shouldn't have major issues...but any financial glitches and man o man....bankruptcy....

Well....here is one Canadian who hopes that your guys can come to some sort of agreement to keep the pie plates in the air for a little while longer

[lilJester]

Long story short, america is a 3rd world nation in the making.

[Guest diaperboykcmo]

Why buy it when your already stealing it while getting paid to do so.

Oh yeah, we're really stealing it! That's why we're paying $3.70 a gallon, what a stupid thing to say! You must hate America, I see you're from the UK!

[sarah_ab]

Oh yeah, we're really stealing it! That's why we're paying $3.70 a gallon, what a stupid thing to say! You must hate America, I see you're from the UK!

DEAR LORD>... you clearly had no idea who bel is!

and to everyone out there... when someone CLEARLY makes a one line post that is pretty obviously said sarcastically/jokingly... CALM DOWN and understand some people don't take everything so seriously...

i mean really this is a forum for people who like to wear diapers and act like babies to congregate but if you'd look at it... it looks like a forum full of whiny babies who need naps!!!!!

laugh a little.... remember this thread is in no way going to change anything.. so voice your opinion but don't take everything so personal.

[belinda_sue_fox]

CALM DOWN, CALM DOWN (in a scouser accent)

[Guest diaperboykcmo]

DEAR LORD>... you clearly had no idea who bel is!

and to everyone out there... when someone CLEARLY makes a one line post that is pretty obviously said sarcastically/jokingly... CALM DOWN and understand some people don't take everything so seriously...

i mean really this is a forum for people who like to wear diapers and act like babies to congregate but if you'd look at it... it looks like a forum full of whiny babies who need naps!!!!!

laugh a little.... remember this thread is in no way going to change anything.. so voice your opinion but don't take everything so personal.

No, I sure don't know who Bel is. All I know, it says they're from the UK, they make a anti American statement saying how were stealing oil. Unless I misunderstood something, that's why I said what I said. I get tired of people saying no blood for oil ect. When we didn't even come close to doing that!

[sarah_ab]

I'm american and i make statements that are 'anti american' according to some people... and we ARE stealing oil in one sense.... whatever.... we are a country run by a bunch of old fat arrogant men.... what do you expect but a sense of elitism to the rest of the world.

and while we may not directly kill people for oil, we sure as hell don't intervene when there are clearly human rights violations if it means we may not get as easy access to certain resources.... you know when you watch someone murder another person and you do nothing you can get convicted for conspiracy and other things??? yeah sorta like that... we know its happening but don't do anything.....

[Diapered Jason]

Lets refocus this argument shall we and can we stop with the negative rep tagging.

I have always been in favor of Keynesian economics, because I think government should play a role in the economy. As I have said, the private sector can make irrational decisions as a whole leading to poor outcomes creating recessions or even a depression. Additionally, the government can inject itself too much leading to poor outcomes as well leading to the very same outcomes. It can be a gamble either way, which is why we need to strike the proper balance.

I think the current economic downturn was actually caused by both government injection as well as private sector greed. The government pushed the banks to lend more home loans leading to the sub-prime lending, while at the same time, the banks taking these risks with the sub-prime loans had a huge stake in the economy, hence the term too big to fail. I partially blame the private sector for this, because these banks should have never been allowed to consolidate to a point where if they fail, the economy fails. I know many people here did not like the bail-outs, but I believe they were a necessity. Look at the bright side though, most of the money used to bail-out the banks and auto manufacturers will all be paid back with interest. Still, these issues I have pointed out have not been resolved as of yet as the size of these banks have not changed.

Despite the government's failure to perform properly recently, I do not think its role in the economy should be removed. I still think the government should invest in the future of the economy. Now, how you invest makes all the difference. For example, corn subsidies have had a large negative impact and you have probably noticed all your foods now contain a corn product now, which was not the intention. On the other hand, investment in research such as nanotechnology and alternative fuel sources has a had a large positive impact. Lets be careful though, rushing application and manufacturing of these technologies with more government subsidies is a mistake and this is exactly what we have been doing. After all, the goal of investing in research for these technologies was to make them economically feasible, not prop them up with further government subsidies for manufacturing products based on those technologies.

My skepticism of our current president begins here after the stimulus bill, because it was not the investment it should have been. The stimulus bill was a failure, and I think that is because the money was given to the states and not directly to the infrastructure projects, research projects, etc. After the money filtered through the state's bureaucracies, there was none left. I am speculating what happened is the states basically used the stimulus money to balance their budgets temporarily, thus preventing income from reaching the economy. I think money from the stimulus bill should never have been given to the states.

It is very likely the economy will eventually recover by itself, but if the stimulus bill had been done right, we would be in a much better situation economic wise. I think we still would have ended up with a budget issue regardless.

Here we stand now. I think I have said everything there is to say now about the topic of government and its role in the economy.

[belinda_sue_fox]

That sarah_ab must be evil..people are always negative rep'ing her!!!!

[LuvsGurl]

This may sound stupid but why doesn't the US government buy up the oil in Iraq and the mineral rights in Afghanistan?

You obviously have no idea how this works... so allow me to explain.

Afghanistan, not so much... but Dubya's war in Iraq was all about oil rights. He sent our armed forces over there using Saddam's suspected "weapons of mass destruction" (which he never had) as justification.

What Bush & Co. really did was topple Iraq's infrastructure and destroy their economy, then rebuild it to suit their desires. While our young men and women were fighting and dying All Bush's friends in Big Oil were negotiating contracts. The US doesn't own the rights to Iraqi oil, companies like Haliburton and Chevron do. They are the ones pumping it now, and most of it is actually being sold off to the Chinese to supply their massive appetite.

[LuvsGurl]

Because money is backed by something like gold, GDP, something of value.

Actually, the Dollar is backed by nothing, nothing physical anyways. When America got off the gold standard the dollar went from being currency to a note of debt. The only thing keeping the dollar propped up right now is America's AAA credit rating. The Treasury has been printing more dollars (QE1 and QE2) and using them to buy US debt back from foreign holders, but because the dollar isn't backed by anything that has caused massive inflation. Another reason gas is $3.50/gal. Your dollar doesn't go as far as it used to. The government has actually considered printing even more money (QE3) in an attempt to shrink America's debt. A portion of the govt. wants inflation to skyrocket so 14Trillion suddenly doesn't seem like such an impossibly immense number. However doing this is a slap in the face to every American with a savings account. 20 years ago if you had $10,000 in the bank it was a big thing... you could live for a while on that. But now inflation has cut the value of that $10,000 by about a third.

[sarah_ab]

hahaha its ok i cant tell you how many times i would go to plus one my rep and hit neg instead!!! but its alright if people at negging me at least it means they are reading my posts!!!! yay people pay attention to me!!!

[BoTox]

Actually, the Dollar is backed by nothing, nothing physical anyways. When America got off the gold standard the dollar went from being currency to a note of debt. The only thing keeping the dollar propped up right now is America's AAA credit rating. The Treasury has been printing more dollars (QE1 and QE2) and using them to buy US debt back from foreign holders, but because the dollar isn't backed by anything that has caused massive inflation. Another reason gas is $3.50/gal. Your dollar doesn't go as far as it used to. The government has actually considered printing even more money (QE3) in an attempt to shrink America's debt. A portion of the govt. wants inflation to skyrocket so 14Trillion suddenly doesn't seem like such an impossibly immense number. However doing this is a slap in the face to every American with a savings account. 20 years ago if you had $10,000 in the bank it was a big thing... you could live for a while on that. But now inflation has cut the value of that $10,000 by about a third.

Ah,all money IS backed by something if it has a real exchange rate. The US dollar is backed by our promise to pay our treasury bills with interest. The US only has so much ability to produce and every time they print more money, you divide that value by the number of dollars in circulation.

Personally, with only half the US population even paying ANY tax, the tax base needs to be expanded. Those getting funds from the government needs to decrease and those paying taxes needs to increase.

Ben Franklin said it best, "I am for doing good to the poor, but...I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed...that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer. "

[Diapered Jason]

Personally, with only half the US population even paying ANY tax, the tax base needs to be expanded. Those getting funds from the government needs to decrease and those paying taxes needs to increase.

Ben Franklin said it best, "I am for doing good to the poor, but...I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed...that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer. "

Funny, according to Grover Norquist, who has Republicans signing his pledge to never raise taxes, that would be a tax increase.

I hear you though. Companies like GE and Exxon Mobile payed 0 taxes this year. On top of that, we have very wealthy people getting off with just a capital gains tax of 15% on their income.

Well of course you do not just give money to the poor like you would a beggar on the street who will likely spend it on booze. The government is not supposed to be a charity. The goal of programs such as welfare is to support people until they find employment, though sometimes these programs are abused. In fact, I think we have been removing people from the welfare payroll too efficiently. I have read about programs set up in some states (Michigan) to remove people from welfare by busing them to a job that can be hours away from where they lived only to be paid minimum wage. Of course that is the wrong way to do it, but that is off topic.

My point is, these programs which are suppose to provide temporary assistance to the poor are actually a good investment. Think about it, the money from these benefits go directly to the people who need it. Then they spend this money, supporting local businesses. If these benefits did not exist, it would be that much less money in the economy. In fact, I think it is one of the few things keeping our economy with such high unemployment afloat. It is not only good for the people who receive these benefits, but it is also good for the rest of us as well. Keep in mind, welfare is a program setup to to support people until they find employment.

[Guest diaperboykcmo]

You obviously have no idea how this works... so allow me to explain.

Afghanistan, not so much... but Dubya's war in Iraq was all about oil rights. He sent our armed forces over there using Saddam's suspected "weapons of mass destruction" (which he never had) as justification.

What Bush & Co. really did was topple Iraq's infrastructure and destroy their economy, then rebuild it to suit their desires. While our young men and women were fighting and dying All Bush's friends in Big Oil were negotiating contracts. The US doesn't own the rights to Iraqi oil, companies like Haliburton and Chevron do. They are the ones pumping it now, and most of it is actually being sold off to the Chinese to supply their massive appetite.

You have quite a imagination! W's war lol! Everyone thought Saddam had WMD'S! He already used them on his own people, that's what he was hanged for! We didn't take a drop of oil from Iraq, funny how people said no blood for oil, when we didn't take any!! You really think the world would be better if Saddam was still here lol. He'd be jacking with us all the time, especially with this weak president. Yeah I'm sure the Iraqi's wish they still had rape rooms and torture chambers! Just cause you hate W, don't just get on here and lie, and think YOU CAN SPEAK FOR THE SOLDIERS OR THE IRAQI'S! I DAMN SURE GURRANTIE YOU, THEY'D TELL YOU YOU'RE FULL OF IT! They would thank President Bush!

[Guest diaperboykcmo]

Funny, according to Grover Norquist, who has Republicans signing his pledge to never raise taxes, that would be a tax increase.

I hear you though. Companies like GE and Exxon Mobile payed 0 taxes this year. On top of that, we have very wealthy people getting off with just a capital gains tax of 15% on their income.

Well of course you do not just give money to the poor like you would a beggar on the street who will likely spend it on booze. The government is not supposed to be a charity. The goal of programs such as welfare is to support people until they find employment, though sometimes these programs are abused. In fact, I think we have been removing people from the welfare payroll too efficiently. I have read about programs set up in some states (Michigan) to remove people from welfare by busing them to a job that can be hours away from where they lived only to be paid minimum wage. Of course that is the wrong way to do it, but that is off topic.

My point is, these programs which are suppose to provide temporary assistance to the poor are actually a good investment. Think about it, the money from these benefits go directly to the people who need it. Then they spend this money, supporting local businesses. If these benefits did not exist, it would be that much less money in the economy. In fact, I think it is one of the few things keeping our economy with such high unemployment afloat. It is not only good for the people who receive these benefits, but it is also good for the rest of us as well. Keep in mind, welfare is a program setup to to support people until they find employment.

This is intentional! BHO is doing this on purpose! Unemployment is the new welfare! 99 weeks unemployed, come on you can get a job! May not be the one you want, but use it as a bridge. Till something better opens up!

GE is in BHO'S POCKET! Jeffery Emilit! Why aren't any jobs created, BHO said he'd never rest till we have jobs! Green jobs BS! Shovel ready jobs BS! He wasted the stimulus! This man is a human wrecking ball!!

[babyfett]

You have quite a imagination! W's war lol! Everyone thought Saddam had WMD'S! He already used them on his own people, that's what he was hanged for! We didn't take a drop of oil from Iraq, funny how people said no blood for oil, when we didn't take any!! You really think the world would be better if Saddam was still here lol. He'd be jacking with us all the time, especially with this weak president. Yeah I'm sure the Iraqi's wish they still had rape rooms and torture chambers! Just cause you hate W, don't just get on here and lie, and think YOU CAN SPEAK FOR THE SOLDIERS OR THE IRAQI'S! I DAMN SURE GURRANTIE YOU, THEY'D TELL YOU YOU'RE FULL OF IT! They would thank President Bush!

Obama weak? Well he did get rid of public enemy number one. Something "W" couldnt do in his eight years in office.

[Guest diaperboykcmo]

Obama weak? Well he did get rid of public enemy number one. Something "W" couldnt do in his eight years in office.

LMFAO LOL! That's a good one! BHO lover, if he didn't follow W's policies, he wouldn't have gotton Bin Laden. Enhanced interrogation is what got him, it was information gained from a guy in Gitmo. That's right the same Gitmo, BHO said he'd close! You know them 2 wars, that put the squeeze on Bin Laden! I can't even believe, you would try to talk this up! Libya, you know were on Al Queda's side, Muslim Brotherhood. They're not the good guys! No blood for oil, where are you anti war protesters! Oh yeah that's right, your boy is in, so it's all good!

[Bettypooh]

hahaha its ok i cant tell you how many times i would go to plus one my rep and hit neg instead!!! but its alright if people at negging me at least it means they are reading my posts!!!! yay people pay attention to me!!!

Oh, did you say something Sarah?

Bettypooh